On Thu, Jun 19, 2014 at 04:18:55PM +0200, Jiri Benc wrote: > On Thu, 3 Apr 2014 11:53:40 +0200, Miroslav Lichvar wrote: > > As a future improvement, I think it would be nice if ptp4l sent a > > notification when exiting so phc2sys could stop its synchronization > > and wait until ptp4l is running again. > > I was thinking about how to implement this. In particular, I'd like > this to be more robust and detect also ptp4l being killed.
... > Thoughts? Different ideas? Really, I don't see the need for any changes in this area. Does ptp4l have a problem with hanging or halting? I don't think so, but if it does, then let us fix that. Any script (or monolithic system control monstrosity) should start and stop ptp4l and phc2sys (and ntp) together. These are single threaded programs that never fork, and so keeping track of PIDs is trivial. How you run these programs depends on the use case within a larger network, and so the overall control decisions should be made at the init script level. If the goal is to be able to keep phc2sys running while restarting ptp4l, then I think it better to have phc2sys accept a "holdover" signal (using SIGUSR1 for example). During holdover, phc2sys knows not to bother with ptp4l. Thanks, Richard ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ HPCC Systems Open Source Big Data Platform from LexisNexis Risk Solutions Find What Matters Most in Your Big Data with HPCC Systems Open Source. Fast. Scalable. Simple. Ideal for Dirty Data. Leverages Graph Analysis for Fast Processing & Easy Data Exploration http://p.sf.net/sfu/hpccsystems _______________________________________________ Linuxptp-devel mailing list Linuxptp-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/linuxptp-devel
